PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

ULEZ & scam websites, PCN for paying ULEZ via scam website
Fred1969
post Fri, 15 Nov 2019 - 21:31
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 77
Joined: 11 Nov 2016
Member No.: 88,375



Similarly to a previous thread ( http://forums.pepipoo.com/index.php?showtopic=129262 ), I paid the ULEZ charge via a scam website, received an email from them confirming receipt of payment ... and received a PCN from TFL a week or two later.

I was able to get back the original £19.99 I paid by phoning my bank and getting a chargeback.
I also cancelled my debit card because I had given them my card number and 3-digit cvv code.
I researched the scammers and posted details of their names & address online ... https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/paylondoncharges.co.uk
I informed the police (Action Fraud), BBC Watchdog (no response), Advertising Standards Authority (who directed me to the NTSA - see below), the local newspaper where they operate (Portishead, Bristol), and the National Trading Standards Authority (NTSA) to whom I gave a written Witness Statement for a possible court case against the scammers.
I kept TFL informed about these actions on my part and offered to pay the original charge which I still owed them. They never accepted this offer.
I made a representation which they rejected.

They argue: "TFL is only responsible for payments made directly to TFL and/or its official agents and cannot be held responsible for any information provided by, or payment made to a third party website."
There does not appear to be a list of "official agents" readily accessible online via a simple google search.
They also emphasise the "extensive advertising and publicity campaign" but fail to acknowledge that they did not give adequate warning about rogue traders like these scammers.
Regarding the exercise of discretion, they state:
"When considering representations, we fully consider all the circumstances presented including any mitigating factors and whether it would be appropriate to apply discretion around the enforcement of the penalty charge notice. In this instance we have made the decision not to exercise that discretion. We do not consider that the mitigating factors present give reason to cancel the PCN. This is because although we acknowledge your receipt [of payment] and the evidence that you provided you have not made a payment via an official Transport for London payment channel. We have no record of payment of a charge for the vehicle registration for the contravention date and we therefore consider the PCN was correctly issued."
So instead of getting £12.50 from me for the charge, they will be getting £80 from me for the PCN. This represents a considerable financial inducement to reject my representation.

Here is my position and a few questions:
1. I accept liability and offered to pay TFL as soon as I found out it was scam site. Late payment is an integral feature of the Congestion Charge and (I am guessing) could easily be applied in this situation for certain cases where the customer has clearly acted in good faith. They rejected this option.
2. I feel I have been victimised twice - first by the scammers and then by TFL, who have failed to act with acceptable discretion, possibly motivated by the financial gain to be made by issuing a PCN. They made £41 million from ULEZ in levies & charges by end Aug. How much does it cost to run the ULEZ system? ... https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/near...l-a4279851.html
3. As a result of TFL's actions, I will write a formal letter of complaint to TFL. Any suggestions for what to include?
4. I have also reported them to the NTSA (National Trading Standards Authority) highlighting the financial inducement to reject representations & go the PCN route. Will they consider this unfair business practices?
5. given the huge financial incentive, is it possible that they have committed a crime? If so, should I write to the police (Action Fraud, UK Financial Regulator, or some other department)?

Any comments on any of the above?

Any advice on next steps?

If I chose to contest the PCN, what are my best arguments?

Or should I contest it (i.e. send in a Notice of Appeal) ... and then pay it before the 14 days are up (and claim it back if my Appeal is successful)?

Many thanks in advance.

This post has been edited by Fred1969: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 - 21:37
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
Advertisement
post Fri, 15 Nov 2019 - 21:31
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
DancingDad
post Fri, 15 Nov 2019 - 22:18
Post #2


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



Sympathise, all too many scam sites out there asking for money, all too easy to get caught.

Re the PCN.
Only TFL can cancel on discretion, adjudicators can't.
At the moment, that seems only ground you have.
But post up your challenge and their rejection in full, let's see if anything better to rely on.
Pictures of them, not transcripts please.

If you want to appeal, do not make any payment. That will be taken as closing the case.

Re fraud, financial incentive etc etc, banging your head against a wall, will get nowhere.
Parliament set up the whole decriminalised scheme for traffic violations with the simple (flawed but simple) premise that authorities will act fairly in considering and representations, without fear or favour and with no incentive to make money.
Once we all stop laughing at that, enforcement authorities are their own judge and jury, the only saving grace is that adjudicators are more independent and gain no financial advantage in accepting or denying appeals.

This post has been edited by DancingDad: Fri, 15 Nov 2019 - 22:18
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fred1969
post Sun, 17 Nov 2019 - 12:35
Post #3


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 77
Joined: 11 Nov 2016
Member No.: 88,375



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 15 Nov 2019 - 22:18) *
Re the PCN.
Only TFL can cancel on discretion, adjudicators can't.
At the moment, that seems only ground you have.


Thanks for your reply.
I would argue that my grounds for appeal fall under category 2: the charge due had been paid for the vehicle used in the charging zone on that date and in the manner required.

This begs the questions:
1. what is meant by "in the manner required"?
2. was the customer adequately informed of "the manner required"?

If the answer to the latter is "no", then the appeal should be allowed.

What do you think?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Sun, 17 Nov 2019 - 12:39
Post #4


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



Paying a scam site is not in the manner required by TFL...

As DD says post the originals but it looks like you're best off paying the discount.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sun, 17 Nov 2019 - 13:41
Post #5


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (Fred1969 @ Sun, 17 Nov 2019 - 12:35) *
……..
This begs the questions:
1. what is meant by "in the manner required"?
2. was the customer adequately informed of "the manner required"?...………..


My problem is that if I put in London ULEZ into Google search box, 1st hit is TFL site, How to Pay etc.
Then TFL Pay the ULEZ
Then.....
Not one scam site
Similar if I put in ULEZ on its own.
Or Pay ULEZ.
Or charges for driving in London.

I know that sites exist, may only be pop sites that cream some bunce and disappear but your issue here is that you would need to persuade that when you made payment you genuinely believed you were paying TFL.
And that TFL were somehow at fault for not making it clear or easy how to pay.
Or an adjudicator would simply do what I have just done, google it, see the results, not accept that you could not get the information.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fred1969
post Sun, 17 Nov 2019 - 14:11
Post #6


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 77
Joined: 11 Nov 2016
Member No.: 88,375



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Sun, 17 Nov 2019 - 13:41) *
I know that sites exist, may only be pop sites that cream some bunce and disappear but your issue here is that you would need to persuade that when you made payment you genuinely believed you were paying TFL.
And that TFL were somehow at fault for not making it clear or easy how to pay.


I can prove that at the time I paid, the scam sites came up top of the list after a google search for "pay ULEZ". They paid google to do this.

TFL now have a warning on their website below the Pay the ULEZ charge button, that reads: Don't pay through unofficial websites ...

But I don't know when this warning was put there. On Wayback Machine the only page saved is from 14 Apr 2019 (the start of the scheme).

Can I obtain this information via a FOI request?

If I can prove that the warning went up on their site AFTER I paid the ULEZ charge, do I have a chance of winning?

Also, where does TFL clarify what is meant by "paid in the manner required"? If there is no clarification on this point, how does the customer know whether or not they have paid the ULEZ charge "in the manner required"?

Cheers
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Sun, 17 Nov 2019 - 18:34
Post #7


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



Fred1969 I'm awfully sorry but I think you have no chance of winning this at adjudication. You could have only seen the warning on the TFL website if you had got the TFL website in the first place, and if you were on the TFL website why would you go to some other website to pay, even in the absence of a warning?

Literally all you have to go on is TFL's discretion. The fact that you've been a victim of fraud is mitigation, maybe even compelling mitigation, but it is not a statutory ground of appeal.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fred1969
post Mon, 18 Nov 2019 - 15:50
Post #8


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 77
Joined: 11 Nov 2016
Member No.: 88,375



Thanks for your advice.

I will pay the PCN.

I will also write to the National Trading Standards Authority, London TravelWatch and the Local Government Ombudsman claiming unfair business practices.

I will let you know if I hear anything from them.

Many thanks
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Mon, 18 Nov 2019 - 16:39
Post #9


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



I don't think it's unreasonable for TFL not to get embroiled in investigating whether reps about these scam sites are genuine - they have to draw the line.

The only angle I can see is whether TFl can be shown to be negligent in not using its weight to get the site shut down but I reckon the scam sites are too numerous and canny to be seen as passing off as TFL and are saying instead that they offer a service.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
cp8759
post Mon, 18 Nov 2019 - 17:29
Post #10


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 38,006
Joined: 3 Dec 2010
Member No.: 42,618



QUOTE (Fred1969 @ Mon, 18 Nov 2019 - 15:50) *
Thanks for your advice.

I will pay the PCN.

I will also write to the National Trading Standards Authority, London TravelWatch and the Local Government Ombudsman claiming unfair business practices.

I don't see how you could claim anything off TFL. I regularly receive emails purporting to be from various international banks telling me that there's millions of dollars waiting for me in a customs clearance facility or whatever, but I could hardly go to the financial ombudsman and file a complaint against the banks involved.


--------------------
If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fred1969
post Mon, 18 Nov 2019 - 17:49
Post #11


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 77
Joined: 11 Nov 2016
Member No.: 88,375



I think this may qualify as unfair business practices - worth a shot - nothing ventured nothing gained.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
John U.K.
post Tue, 19 Nov 2019 - 13:18
Post #12


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,308
Joined: 9 May 2014
Member No.: 70,515



You may find this article from last Sunday's Telegraph of interest:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/katie-inv...-t-charge-scam/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fred1969
post Tue, 19 Nov 2019 - 14:01
Post #13


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 77
Joined: 11 Nov 2016
Member No.: 88,375



QUOTE (John U.K. @ Tue, 19 Nov 2019 - 13:18) *
You may find this article from last Sunday's Telegraph of interest:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/katie-inv...-t-charge-scam/


Thanks - very interesting. I have written to the paper as well.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fred1969
post Thu, 21 Nov 2019 - 12:30
Post #14


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 77
Joined: 11 Nov 2016
Member No.: 88,375



Well, we seem to have caused something of a stir! My PCN has been cancelled !!

I paid the PCN (£80) on 18/11/19.

And the same day ...
1. I filed a Notice of Appeal to get the money refunded (with a very weak argument indeed and I would have expected to lose).
I also wrote:
2. a formal letter of complaint to TFL claiming unfair business practices
3. the same to the National Trading Standards Authority
4. the same to the Local Government Ombudsman

And on 19/11/19 ...
5. I wrote a letter to Katie Morley, consumer champion at The Telegraph (thank you John U.K. for the link above).

Today (21/11/19) I received an email from TFL apologising for the way in which my complaint was handled, stating that the level of service I received was below standard, that feedback has been given to the individuals concerned, that a thorough review of their processes in these circumstances has been carried out and changes have been implemented. And then as a gesture of goodwill, they have arranged for my PCN to be cancelled and a refund made to my debit card.

I am flabbergasted!

I don't know which of the actions above resulted in the cancellation. Does anyone have any guesses?

Maybe this goes to show that simply appealing the PCN is not enough? Other measures may have a greater chance of success?

What do you think?

And thanks again to everyone for your help.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stamfordman
post Thu, 21 Nov 2019 - 12:50
Post #15


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 23,582
Joined: 12 Feb 2013
From: London
Member No.: 59,924



That is amazing. I would venture that you shamed them into exercising discretion as an honest and credible person.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mike5100
post Thu, 21 Nov 2019 - 16:58
Post #16


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 162
Joined: 16 Jun 2019
Member No.: 104,319



Is it even possible for TFL to 'refund to your debit card' if they have no connection with the scammers who diddled you in the first place?
Mike
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fred1969
post Thu, 21 Nov 2019 - 17:23
Post #17


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 77
Joined: 11 Nov 2016
Member No.: 88,375



QUOTE (mike5100 @ Thu, 21 Nov 2019 - 16:58) *
Is it even possible for TFL to 'refund to your debit card' if they have no connection with the scammers who diddled you in the first place?
Mike


TFL will refund the £80 I paid for the PCN ... I already got my bank to refund me the £19.99 I paid the scammers.

:-)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Thu, 21 Nov 2019 - 17:24
Post #18


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (mike5100 @ Thu, 21 Nov 2019 - 16:58) *
Is it even possible for TFL to 'refund to your debit card' if they have no connection with the scammers who diddled you in the first place?
Mike
...uhmmmm...
QUOTE
I paid the PCN (£80) on 18/11/19.


Well done.
Must admit my gast has never been so flabbered but hey, good result.
Don't know what worked but something did.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fred1969
post Sat, 21 Dec 2019 - 12:31
Post #19


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 77
Joined: 11 Nov 2016
Member No.: 88,375



QUOTE
Well done.
Must admit my gast has never been so flabbered but hey, good result.
Don't know what worked but something did.


Another major victory!! TFL have agreed that in future they will allow all people who have been victims of the online scam above to PAY THE DAILY RATE INSTEAD OF THE PCN.

biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fred1969
post Sat, 6 Jun 2020 - 15:48
Post #20


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 77
Joined: 11 Nov 2016
Member No.: 88,375



I'm just following up on my case above, which has now been resolved to my great satisfaction.

In the end, it was the action of the Local Government Ombudsman that won the day. After receiving my letter, he/she phoned TFL and made enquiries about the case. In the end TFL changed their policies and procedures to allow anyone that is the victim of an online ULEZ scam to pay the £12.50 Late Payment Fee rather than the £80 PCN. The case has now been published on the website of the Local Government Ombudsman here ... https://www.lgo.org.uk/decisions/transport-...ties/19-014-452

The key point is here: Transport for London has also agreed to deal with the issue in future by allowing affected motorists to pay the daily charge rather than the full cost of the penalty charge.

All's well that end's well ....

(nice for a change!)

And thanks again to everyone who helped me.

biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 23:57
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here